Comparison of three different iodine-based bowel regimens for CT colonography.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 19711082.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1007/s00330-009-1553-9.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the computed tomographic colonography (CTC) image quality and patient acceptance of three iodine-based faecal tagging bowel preparations in 60 patients undergoing the following regimens: a 2-day regimen of meal-time administration of iodine and phospho-soda (GFPH); a 2-day regimen of meal-time mild laxative, followed by iodine administered 2 h before CTC (SD); and a 2-day regimen of meal-time administration of iodine (GF). Two independent radiologists assessed tagging quality; quantitative measures included the tagged stool density, and computer-aided detection (CAD) false-positive rate. The GFPH and SD regimens provided better subjective quality than GF (p < 0.001). The latter regimen resulted in a higher proportion of insufficiently tagged segments: the measured average stool density was less than 200 HU in 10.7% in all segments vs 3.6% for SD and <0.5% for GFPH, respectively. Insufficient tagging occurred mostly in the ascending colon and the caecum. The CAD false-positive rate increased following the trend: GFPH < SD < GF (p = 0.00012). GFPH was worse tolerated than SD (p < 0.05). Considering preparation quality alone, GFPH was the best regimen, but SD provided the best balance between bowel preparation quality and patient acceptability.
Medical subject headings
- Attitude to Health
- Colonography, Computed Tomographic
- Colorectal Neoplasms
- Intestines
- Iodine
- Patient Acceptance of Health Care